Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.

quote:Originally posted by Qtownranger I welcome suggestions from anyone regardless of nationality on how we could improve the Brier and Scotties. Clearly we have not yet achieved perfection, as evidenced by empty seats and meaningless blowouts in the early rounds of both tournaments. It's possible that we have to re-think our approach to Olympic qualification too, in light of current knowledge of athletic performance.

If we insist on every province and territory competing in the Brier & Scotties, then we will continue to see blowouts. I think the "play-in" concept is positive in bringing very good teams to the field.
I don't have the answers but would like to see continued experimentation and brainstorming.
QR

Lots of blowouts in SLAM games and events as well. everyone needs to stop worrying about who finishs last in the field.

Man what a refreshing post to read on this subject matter. I no longer need every region and nook and cranny in our country to have a team at the Brier or Scotties. Those days are gone for me. I would rather watch 4 good teams from a province than one team from a few of them. These blowouts are not the fault of the great teams betting better and having any advantages either. They work hard at the game and make sacrifices to reach their potential. And if the Brier and Scotties are not careful, no major TV network will cover an event if 10 or 11 out of 16 teams are what we saw this year.

Disagree. The Brier and STOH are an excellent cash cow for a sports network. They have a dedicated fan base and thanks to the Olympic exposure, viewership is on the rise.

There's little doubt in my mind this event featured the best 24 teams in the world. Why do you not agree?

And when you state that recent competitions "seem to show there are other good teams capable", exactly what competitions are you referring to? Also, who are the other "good teams", and what do you mean by "capable"?

Jamcan, here is an excerpt from the blog you say you wrote and provided the URL for us to refer to "Nope. Out of their slimy holes come the haters and trolls jumping on the anti-Homan bandwagon calling them every name in the book. It was disgusting and undeserved. But seeing as this is my blog, I get the last word to these idiots: you’re *******s, and ignorant ones at that. You’re also hypocrites because 99% of you would have done exactly as she did.

quote:Originally posted by Ajay Jamcan, here is an excerpt from the blog you say you wrote and provided the URL for us to refer to "Nope. Out of their slimy holes come the haters and trolls jumping on the anti-Homan bandwagon calling them every name in the book. It was disgusting and undeserved. But seeing as this is my blog, I get the last word to these idiots: you’re *******s, and ignorant ones at that. You’re also hypocrites because 99% of you would have done exactly as she did.

ah, you're referring to a totally different blog entry that isn't 'When is Enough, Enough?' .

The one you refer to has nothing to do with this or the other thread about playdown changes so I fail to see the relevancy of you citing a passage from it. except as a lame attempt to distract others here from reading the blog that actually deals with this thread topic.

However, I stand by what I wrote in that particular entry. And the word I used, accurately, was not aimed at any one group, but all who leaped on the hate bandwagon. The sheer ignorance of those who jumped all over Homan still makes me shake my head in dismay.

You might be offended at that, but sobeit, as the rest of us were similarly offended by the way a Canadian athlete, playing within the rules and spirit of the game, was treated.

quote:Originally posted by Deliverer
There's little doubt in my mind this event featured the best 24 teams in the world. Why do you not agree?

I'll give you 24 *of* the best teams in the world. I might even give you "the 24 teams who had the best 2017-2018 Curling seasons", but that doesn't necessarily mean they are the 24 best teams in the world period full stop.

Alan makes a great point. Because just who the 'best teams are will always, no matter what kind of points system is used, be argued about subjectively.

So why not just accept the fact that there are a ton of great teams, all over the world and just enjoy watching whomever is on the sheet in front of you. You'll have lots more fun and discover more teams and players to watch.

"I might also give the 24 teams who had the best 2017 - '18 curling season (s) ".

Can hardly wait! Who are they?

And in addition to simply enumerating the 24 best teams in each of your categories, please provide us with a detailed explanation of the specific criteria you used to rank each of these teams as well as the weight you assigned to each criteria.

I'm sure everybody will want to compare your list of the so-called 24 best teams with the teams which actually participated in the Players'.

quote:Originally posted by Deliverer What we're all still waiting for is YOUR list of the 12 best men's teams, and YOUR list of the 12 best women's teams.

And plse. ensure both are demonstrably truthful !!

FWIW

lol. Demonstrably truthful sounds like a Trump spin like 'fake news'.

Anyone's list (except Manitoba Legend of course. He'll call you a troll and boast he can get you kicked off the site for questioning his facts. LMFAO) is subjective and therefore wide open to argument.

The very systems used to collect the OOM or CTRS points are questionable themselves thus any rankings they show are open to scrutiny and discussion on their accuracy and validity.

No list or system will ever make anyone happy. But systems that grandfather points need to be reconsidered. Some don't like it, but the reality is the best measurement of team quality is the current season's results, not two or 3 seasons past.

Either way, you both should agree to disagree. Because you're both right and wrong,

Hey Alan, since this fella
Jamcan, is claiming we're both probably wrong, ( and he may well be correct ) should we not at least hold his feet to the fire and have him submit HIS own personal list of the top 24 ?

I don't have a list of top teams as I consider them irrelevant and, frankly, useless argument starters.

The only things I look at is who won the National Championships, the Worlds and, every 4 years, the Olympics.

As far as I'm concerned, any team that reaches those events through a true competition and not subjective coaching selection is a 'top team'.

And we'd all be far better off if we all started viewing competitive curling as such. As I've said before, there's a lot more great teams out there to watch. Just get your ass off the couch and head over to the nearest club when they have a cashspiel or playdown event and see for yourself.